The growing number of inferior vena cava (IVC) filter lawsuits are raising questions in the public and medical community regarding the fatal design flaws of the temporary IVC filter models.

Thousands of Americans at risk for blood clot attacks had IVC filters implanted, but now many are worried over inferior vena cava filter complications.

IVC filters are small cage like devices, which are directly implanted into the inferior vena cava. These devices stop and trap blood clots that form in the legs and pelvis from traveling up to the heart and lungs, preventing blood clot attack.

There are permanent models and retrievable models for patients to choose from, with the temporary models receiving the negative press surrounding the inferior vena cava filter complications.

Overview of Inferior Vena Cava Complications

According to a recent investigation conducted by NBC News, approximately 27 deaths related to inferior vena cava filter complications have been reported in the past decade.

In addition, government data indicates that 300 other non fatal inferior vena cava filter complications have been reported from the C.R. Bard Recovery IVC filter alone.

After the scrutiny over the Recovery IVC filter began escalating, Bard had hired public relations company Hill and Knowlton to try and limit the amount of “unfavorable press.”

The company also reportedly contracted a doctor to conduct a confidential study, later obtained by NBC News, which showed that the Recovery IVC filter had higher risk of death, filter fracture compared to its competitors.

Even though the doctor wrote that further investigation was urgently needed to better assess the inferior vena cava complications, Bard had reportedly opted not recall the Recovery IVC.

For over the course of three years, Bard had sold approximately 34,000 of these devices before replacing them with their G2 IVC filter line.

Bard officials declined to comment or give interviews to NBC News, but stated that all of their IVC filters had been “appropriately cleared by [the] FDA based on required and accurate documentation and that when used as instructed they demonstrate ‘significant benefits to patients.’”

However, it is important to note that it took more than one attempt for Bard to clear the Recovery IVC filter.

According to veteran regulatory specialist Kay Fuller, who helped the company get clearance during their second try, it was troubling how the company handled the application.

Fuller stated that Bard had allegedly failed to give her important safety evaluation tests of the product, and that a small clinical trial had raised significant concern.

After voicing her feedback, Bard had reportedly sent her a message that she would be removed from the team if she pursued her concerns.

It is currently estimated that a quarter of a million IVC filters are implanted in patients who cannot safely use blood thinners.

While most cases progress ideally, C.R. Bard and the ten other IVC filter manufacturing companies are facing an increasing amount of negative press regarding inferior vena cava complications.

A number of patients have filed legal action against these manufacturing companies for failing to warn them against inferior vena cava filter complications. Potential claimants should contact a specialized lawyer, to determine their eligible for an IVC filter lawsuit.